Good news: Obama to lift part of lobbyist ban

[dismal]

More than four years after prohibiting lobbyists from serving on some federal agency boards, the White House appears to be changing course.

Politico reported Tuesday that registered lobbyists will now be able to serve on more than 1,000 industry boards, panels and commissions -- as long as they are advising a client. The changes will be reflected in new guidance from the Office of Management and Budget, which is set to go live Wednesday on the Federal Register.

...

Charles Rothfeld, a lawyer who represented the lobbyists, told The Hill on Tuesday that the decision "vindicates the First Amendment rights of these individuals, while also allowing trade agencies to benefit from their technical expertise."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/12/white-house-lobbyist-ban_n_5672553.html

Let us all celebrate this victory for the First Amendment, and look forward to the fruits generated by the new policies imbued with the technical expertise of these lobbyists.

Let us also laud Obama for realizing he made a mistake and correcting it.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

That Community Obama.

 

[untermensche]

Their so-called "expertise" is getting the government to do things the majority doesn't want but a tiny few does.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Their so-called "expertise" is getting the government to do things the majority doesn't want but a tiny few does.

It falls into the gray area of "Yes these people have expertise and that expertise is extremely valuable and should be consulted, however, lobbying seems to be less about sharing expertise and more about getting dollars, influence, and giving outgoing Representatives cushy jobs."

 

[Nice Squirrel]

They are our betters and know best. God bless the lobbyists.

 

[dismal]

More on the topic:

How K Street beat Obama

A POLITICO review shows that the Obama administration has hired about 70 previously registered corporate, trade association and for-hire lobbyists. And many of these former lobbyists work at the highest levels of government.

...

“Lobbyists are easy political targets for presidential candidates and for freshly minted presidents,” said Jeff Birnbaum, a longtime lobbying reporter at The Washington Post and K Street watcher who now heads up public relations at the firm BGR Group.

“But when a president and his staff get down to doing hard work of governing, they quickly realize that they need serious experts on a wide range of complicated topics to get the job done,” Birnbaum said. “Lobbyists are often the experts presidents need so it was a mistake for the Obama administration to exclude and vilify them.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/08/obamas-revolving-door-109930.html

It's good to see Obama correct this mistake and make use of these valuable experts.

 

[fromderinside]

More on the topic:

“...they (Obama administration) quickly realize that they need serious experts on a wide range of complicated topics to get the job done,” ...

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/08/obamas-revolving-door-109930.html

It's good to see Obama correct this mistake and make use of these valuable experts.

Yes using serious experts (Lobbyists) does translate into value (ca-ching) for proponents of one thing or another./sarcasm

There is a world of experts who don't have money bloodied axes to grind. We don't need greased advocates to make social value judgments about industry and its practices. We seriously don't need proponents of those grinding moneyed axes whacking away rights and safety.

 

[doubtingt]

More on the topic:



http://www.politico.com/story/2014/08/obamas-revolving-door-109930.html

It's good to see Obama correct this mistake and make use of these valuable experts.

Yes using serious experts (Lobbyists) does translate into value (ca-ching) for proponents of one thing or another./sarcasm

There is a world of experts who don't have money bloodied axes to grind. We don't need greased advocates to make social value judgments about industry and its practices. We seriously don't need proponents of those grinding moneyed axes whacking away rights and safety.

^^^THIS^^^. To expand on this, valuable expert knowledge relevant to policy is neither a neccessary nor sufficient criteria for being a lobbyists. Only some lobbyist have such expertise relevant to the public good (rather than only to the good of a particular industry), and the vast majority of experts including the most competent of them are not lobbyists. Thus, the public is in no way served by allowing lobbyists to determine policy and the highly probable corruption they bring far far outweighs their likely contributions that could easily be gained from non-lobbyist experts.

Also, it is absolute absurd to claim this is a 1st Amendment issue. No one's rights are in any way being hampered by rules that protect against self-serving conflicts of interests among policy makers. It as ridiculous as saying that DUI laws violate basic rights of consuming what we want or of mobility. They do not prevent people from doing either, they just protect high probability harm to the public when done at the same time.

A POLITICO review shows that the Obama administration has hired about 70 previously registered corporate, trade association and for-hire lobbyists. And many of these former lobbyists work at the highest levels of government.

The "previously" part makes all the difference in the world. No one is saying lobbyist are inherently evil people born to corrupt the political system in favor of a few wealthy corporate interests. That is just their job description when they are corporate and industry lobbyists. If they severe themselves for a period of time from this clear bias upon which their job directly depends and now serve only their new governmental role and no longer that biased interest, then they just a person with experience in how the government operates and perhaps issue-relevant knowledge rather than a person who still stands to directly profit by steering policy towards narrow interests.

 

[Emily Lake]

I have quite serious ethical objections to lobbyists serving on policy boards. I have internal conflict when it comes to lobbyists at all.